0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Turbomachinery

Aerodynamic Effects of Tie-Boss in Extremely Long Turbine Blades

[+] Author and Article Information
Tomáš Radnic

Institute of Thermomechanics of the Czech
Academy of Sciences,
Doješkova 1402/5,
Prague 182 00, Czech Republic
e-mail: Radnic@it.cas.cz

Jindřich Hála

Institute of Thermomechanics of the Czech
Academy of Sciences,
Doješkova 1402/5,
Prague 182 00, Czech Republic
e-mail: Hala@it.cas.cz

Martin Luxa

Institute of Thermomechanics of the Czech
Academy of Sciences,
Doješkova 1402/5,
Prague 182 00, Czech Republic
e-mail: Luxa@it.cas.cz

David Šimurda

Institute of Thermomechanics of the Czech
Academy of Sciences,
Doješkova 1402/5,
Prague 182 00, Czech Republic
e-mail: Simurda@it.cas.cz

Jiří Fürst

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
Department of Technical Mathematics,
CTU in Prague,
Karlovo nám. 13,
Prague 121 35, Czech Republic
e-mail: Jiri.Furst@fs.cvut.cz

Dan Hasnedl

Doosan Skoda Power Co. Ltd.,
Tylova 1/57,
Pilsen 301 28, Czech Republic
e-mail: Dan.Hasnedl@doosan.com

Josef Kellner

Doosan Skoda Power Co. Ltd.,
Tylova 1/57,
Pilsen 301 28, Czech Republic
e-mail: Josef.kellner@doosan.com

Contributed by the Turbomachinery Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received June 16, 2017; final manuscript received February 19, 2018; published online July 31, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Riccardo Da Soghe.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 140(11), 112604 (Jul 31, 2018) (9 pages) Paper No: GTP-17-1218; doi: 10.1115/1.4040093 History: Received June 16, 2017; Revised February 19, 2018

Focus of this paper is aerodynamic investigation of tie-boss stabilization devices for extremely long rotor blades. This investigation covered measurements on multiple blade cascades and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation of the flow past these cascades. Conclusions were drawn from results of the measurements and CFD and from the knowledge of prior investigation of the used blade cascade. Main focus of this paper is to describe influence of a tie-boss stabilization device on flow field in interblade channel. Tie-boss with more massive shape proved to cause lesser losses, while tie-boss with a tailored trailing edge showed lesser influence on flow turning.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Shigeki, S. , Kunio, A. , Atsuhiro, K. , and Goingwon, L. , 2013, “ Titanium 50-Inch and 60-Inch Last-Stage Blades for Steam Turbines,” Hitachi Rev., 62, pp. 23–30. http://www.hitachi.com/rev/pdf/2013/r2013_01_103.pdf
Duan, C. , Ishibashi, K. , Senoo, S. , Bosdas, I. , Mansour, M. , and Kalfas, A. I. , 2016, “ Unsteady Wet Steam Flow Measurements in a Low-Pressure Test Steam Turbine,” Int. J. Fluid Mach. Syst., 9(1), pp. 85–94. [CrossRef]
Yashimata, Y. , Shiohata, K. , Kudo, T. , and Yoda, H. , 2012, “ Vibration Characteristics of a Continuous Cover Blade Structure With Friction Contact Surfaces of a Steam Turbine,” Tenth International Conference on Vibrations in Rotating Machinery, London, Sept. 11–13, Paper No. C1324/048.
Míšek, T. , and Kubín, Z. , 2009, “ Static and Dynamic Analysis of 1 220 mm Steel Last Stage Blade for Steam Turbine,” Appl. Comput. Mech., 3, pp. 133–140. https://dspace5.zcu.cz/bitstream/11025/1905/6/acm_vol3no1_p12.pdf
Hoznedl, M. , Kolovratník, M. , Sedlák, K. , Bednář, L. , Kalista, R. , Bartoš, O. , and Mrózek, L. , 2016, “ Flow Conditions at the Last Stage and in the Exhaust Hood of the Turbine 1090 MW for Saturated Steam,” Turbostroje (in Czech), Pilsen, Paper No. 2.
Luxa, M. , Šimurda, D. , Šafařík, P. , Synáč, J. , and Rudas, B. , 2013, “ High-Speed Aerodynamic Investigation of the Midsection of 48″ Rotorblade for the Last Stage of Steam Turbine,” Tenth European Conference on Turbomachinery—Fluid Dynamics and Thermodynamics (ETC), Lappeenranta, Finland, Apr. 15–19, pp. 360–369. http://www.euroturbo.eu/paper/ETC2013-116.pdf
Luxa, M. , Synáč, J. , Šafařík, P. , and Šimurda, D. , 2012, “ Causes and Solution of Aperiodicity of Supersonic Flow Field Downstream of a Profile Cascade,” Komunikácie, 14(4a), pp. 23–28.
JCGM, 2008, Evaluation of Measurement Data—Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology.
Menter, F. R. , 1994, “ Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for Engineering Applications,” AIAA J., 32(8), pp. 1598–1605. [CrossRef]
Toro, E. F. , 1997, Riemann Solvers and Numerical Methods for Fluid Dynamics, Springer, Berlin, pp. 293–311. [CrossRef]
Barth, T. , and Jespersen, D. , 1989, “ The Design and Application of Upwind Schemes on Unstructured Meshes,” AIAA Paper No. 1989–366.
Shen, C. , Xia, X. L. , Wang, Y. Z. , Yu, F. , and Jiao, W. , 2016, “ Implementation of Density-Based Implicit LU-SGS Solver in the Framework of OpenFOAM,” Adv. Eng. Software, 91, pp. 80–88.
Fürst, J. , 2017, “ On the Implicit Density Based OpenFOAM Solver for Turbulent Compressible Flows,” EPJ Web of Conf., 143, p. 02027. [CrossRef]
Šimurda, D. , Fürst, J. , and Luxa, M. , 2013, “ 3D Flow Past Transonic Turbine Cascade SE 1050—Experiment and Numerical Simulation,” J. Therm. Sci., 22(4), pp. 311–319. [CrossRef]
Launder, B. E. , and Spalding, D. B. , 1974, “ The Numerical Computation of Turbulent Flows,” Comput. Appl. Mech. Eng., 3(2), pp. 269–289. [CrossRef]
Roache, P. , 1997, “ Quantification of Uncertainty in Computational Fluid Dynamics,” Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech., 29(1), pp. 123–160. [CrossRef]
Amecke, J. , and Šafařík, P. , 1995, “ Data Reduction of Wake Flow Measurements With Injection of an Other Gas,” DLR, Forschungsbericht, Göttingen, pp. 95–32.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Tie-boss in a turbine rotor wheel of the last stage composed of 1220 mm long blades

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Type I tie-boss profile and cross section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Type II tie-boss profile and cross section

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Wind tunnel layout: (1) silica-gel dryer, (2) particle filters, (3) entrance nozzle, (4) deformable inlet nozzle, (5) turning test section, (6) settling chamber, (7) control nozzle, (8) quick acting valve, (9) diffuser, and (10) vacuum chamber

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The cascade geometry, inlet flow angle, and exit flow angle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Test section configuration with static pressure tapping and perforated tailboard

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Coverage of the traversing plane with refinement in the middle of the channel and near walls of wind tunnel

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Schlieren photography of the perforated tailboard for improved periodicity of the flow field

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Distribution of Mach number in cascade with type II tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Distribution of kinetic energy loss coefficient in cascade with type I tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Distribution of Mach number in cascade with type I tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Distribution of kinetic energy loss coefficient in cascade without tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Distribution of Mach number in a cascade without tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Interferogram of a cascade without tie-boss with marked sonic plane trace

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Traces of sonic planes at different spanwise distances from tie-boss body. Blue represents simulation with tie-boss and walls, red represents simulation with tie-boss without walls, and black represents simulation without tie-boss and with walls in the middle of the channel. The same line can be seen in Fig. 14.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Relative positions of sections of sonic planes investigation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Spanwise distribution of the difference in kinetic energy loss coefficient in the CFD simulation of cascades with type I tie-boss, with (1) and without (2) the side walls

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Distribution of isentropic Mach number on the surface of the blade without tie-boss installed

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Distribution of kinetic energy loss coefficient in cascade with type II tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Visualization of the surface streamlines on type I tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Visualization of large density gradient from CFD simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Visualization of surface streamlines of type II tie-boss–side view

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Visualization of surface streamlines of type II tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Distribution of exit flow angle difference from the reference value in cascade with type I tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

Distribution of exit flow angle difference from the reference value in cascade with type II tie-boss

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 26

Velocity vectors mapped on a plane perpendicular to the blade wake. The plane is located 22 mm behind the trailing edge of an adjacent blade (CFD of tie-boss type I).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 27

Comparison of relative kinetic energy loss coefficient of both measured models and CFD simulations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 28

Comparison of exit flow angle difference of both measured models and CFD simulations of tie-bosses

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In